Kent State Karen

when you sign up for those sites, you agree to their rules. If ya dont like it, dont use them>

While I am no fan of Kent State chick and do not use Twitter or FB, if they are going to pick and choose what they allow to be posted they should not be indemnified from lawsuits with regard to libel and slander. Either they are a platform that allows everything or they are pundit sites and have responsibilities for their content.

I have posted on the Fox web site. They block my posts- it looks like i posted but they ?ghost? they do not appreciate anyone not up clumpys butt and blind- i want to sue them, wah wah
I make new accounts and those get ghosted- i think they have blocked my IP address

I am no fan of Fox but...They don’t have indemnification from slander / libel laws. You can sue them if they are guilty of either one. You cannot sue Twitter or FB.

my point is that they sensor my comments. posting on social media isnt in the constitution

Agreed, it's not in the Constitution. So allow Twitter and FB to be sued for libel when they are guilty of it and then they can post or delete at will. They can't get protections as a platform that allows all positions if they in fact do NOT allow all positions.

they are private companies they can allow what they want- if you dont agree delete your account and find the right site that allows your stupid, racist, rants.

Ouch...I have neither account and am far from someone who posts racist rants anywhere. I try to avoid name calling and personal insults. I was pointing out the legal disparity. All the best to you in the crazy das ahead.

show me where private companies have to allow CLumpy or any other racists rants on their sites. Are you for govt telling private companies what they can and can not do?

imgflip.com/i/4d94cj

46d5eh.jpg (click to show)

You sure like to throw the racist labels around awfully quickly. Here's a couple of the "racist" memes I made months ago. All the best to you.

i dont read racist rants, sorry.

No, exactly the opposite. I am for consistency. If the platforms simply post EVERYTHING with no editorial control then they SHOULD have indemnification from libel and slander lawsuits. If they limit some content or one point of view (like FB, Twitter, etc...) they should NOT be immune from lawsuits.

A few short years ago the U.S. government denied fluoride in the water, GMO foods and chemtrails. The pressure from the tin foil hat crowd is what got them to admit these things were in fact true and give us an explanation. Do you think any of these anti government positions would have made it through today's fact checkers?

I will accept some "hate speech" getting through in the name of freedom of speech. I further do not trust ANYONE on either side to be the authority on what is or what is not "hate speech". Today it seems like the left has the upper hand in deciding but a shift to where the right has control is probably not as far off as people think.

Govt should stay out of private business. Twitter and FB are entitled to allow or disallow whomever they want. If you dont like it, find a site where your racism is welcomed. You feel over important that people care what you think, what you eat and how much you hate anyone not white.